1 CGHC010217742026 2026:CGHC:40798 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5398 of 2026 1 - Suyash Singh Rajput S/o Shri Lala Singh Aged About 31 Years R/o Vinoba Nagar, Gali Number 2, Police Station Tarbahar, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Tarbahar, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate For Respondent/State : Dr. Sourabh Pande, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18.09.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 333/2024, registered at Police Station Tarbahar District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 103, 238, 3(5) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant, Vinod Kumar, Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.09.21 12:47:09 +0530 2 lodged a report alleging that his nephew, Hariom Singh, was beaten by Indrajeet Yadav, Suyash Singh Rajput and other persons on the night of 24.10.2024 in connection with a money dispute. It is further alleged that the present applicant, along with other co-accused persons, got the victim picked up from his residence on the night of 24.10.2024 and took him to their place of work, where he was beaten by the present applicant along with Saksham Pandey, Indrajeet Yadav Santoshi Soni, Tushar Majumdar, Harshit Gouraha and Daman Singh. Thereafter, on 25.10.2024 at about 6:00 a.m., the victim was left near his residence in an injured condition. He was subsequently taken to the hospital for treatment, where he succumbed to his injuries on 25.10.2024 at about 2:15 p.m. On the report of the complainant, an FIR was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 238 and 3(5) of the BNS. The present applicant was arrested on 28.10.2024. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that there are general allegations of assault against the present applicant. The co-accused persons, against whom similar allegations have been made in the FIR and in the statements of the witnesses, and out of them, two co-accused persons, namely, Santosh Soni and Saksham Pandey, have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(Crl.) No. 7799/2026 and SLP(Crl.) Nos. 12306-12307/2026 respectively. He would further submit that the investigation has already been completed and the applicant has been in custody since 28.10.2024. He, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, Dr. Sourabh Pande, learned Deputy Advocate General, would submit that there are serious allegations against the present applicant, as he, along with the other co-accused persons, 3 assaulted the deceased, Hariom Singh, with a wooden club, hands and fists, causing injuries to him, to which he eventually succumbed. He would, therefore, submit that the bail application of the applicant may be rejected. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the present applicant, the fact that the investigation has already been completed, and further considering that two of the co-accused persons, namely, Santosh Soni and Saksham Pandey, against whom similar allegations have been made in the FIR have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(Crl.) No. 7799/2026 and SLP(Crl.) Nos. 12306-12307/2026 respectively, as also the fact that the applicant is in custody since 28.10.2024, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. 4 (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Jyoti